Arxiv:Physics/0002019 9 Feb 2000

Home , Planck units

, t y t w xin ving 1686 ysical h had ork of bue an y there ergen k Holes tro duced ed as just arado div P eim yp erp oin ted wh tities. Instead h a functions, the hanics. In o dolsky and the tro duction of an x in Blac ysical ground b EPR TIVITY tist ything external " . tities under no other ards in time, random arado ysical en ysical concepts that so ble, Newton in us at the foundations of kw ersal standard whic hanics. Instead of ha ysics on ph t. In this fashion w y in in nite dimensions that has willing to accept. wn that within the framew e those quan h a thing as an tit tum Mec ws through the in nite-dimensional y Principle [1] that rest on the four tro duced. The old "absolutes " had ards and bac , set Ph y one of us. This can b e view e the Einstein-Rosen P ysical notions, stand outside the realm b er of paths in an In nite Dimensional y Theory requires the in ery same Metaph kground tly b y um ysical Systems ts required a univ xes lik t, in an instan ysical phenomena. Th y one of the authors as the underlying ph ersit aci c ysics ts had b een in orth, a true pioneer and a scien arado ulation of Quan t. ords do not b ear " relation to an wn recen XES AND THE NEW RELA y there is no suc . It is explicitly sho wn admission, are un 1 ta Univ tofPh yp erp oin h New Relativit wn w y of the P uary 2000 paths, smo oth, forw . Measuremen ta, GA. 30314 tlan y Abstract hanical P Alex Granik Jan al l Theory Carlos Castro due to a sup erluminal information sp eed but to a ersit tro duce the New Relativit ARADO ysical meaning : it is an en tegral form tlan y their o ed. Suc kton, California 95211 ysical phenomena, and not to the metaph er A yisical concepts. The v M or this reason, Information o v ,b ein not h in his o Departmen y Univ y principle has b een one of the cornerstones of mec Clark A Sto c t. F ysical measuremen tum Mec ew e, that the common p eople conceiv unit y : the sp eed of ligh tro duction : Historical bac yp ersphere, of nite nonzero radius, shrinks to zero : to a yiscal concepts of absolute space, time, and motion, new rather narro tegral o e metaph , Newton wrote : " I do not de ne time, space, place, and motion, as b eing tit v t a few-lines pro of wh ter for Theoretical Studies of Ph 1. In View metadata,citationandsimilarpapersatcore.ac.uk y Principle has b een prop osed b e only to the ph -dim h t" with a true ph ust observ Cen eynman's path in D ti c comm , some Quan . In the in nite dimensional limit, due to the prop erties of gamm . The reason is tum Spacetime as has b een sho Y, QUANTUM P y e presen P r incipia ya arXiv:physics/0002019 9 Feb 2000 ysical quan h rather broadly , and then Einstein de nitely ts relativ e the purp ose of " geometrization " of ph ysical concepts of ph h absolute space, time, motion, are purely metaph y theory y Theory y Einstein's Theory of Relativit ted in the next section. In the last sections an amazingly simple pro of is presen yaph hanics lie the ab o ery b eginning the relativit harge densit Dedicated to the memory of Leonard Ainsw olume at nonzero radius . A plausible resolution of the Information Loss P y of lo oking at F b ers of the scien tly a New Relativit a h later, Mac wn to all. Only I m ON M THEOR olume enclosed b yp erv rom the v ell de ned ph tum Spacetime. W ysics, and serv Based on this historical p ersp ectiv Muc F Recen y mem k Hole Information Loss, are easily resolv aguely-de ned if at all metaph ell kno yp erv yp ersurface of nonzero radius, but zero size, the h of v but w b een dismissed b b een furnished b p ostulates presen de ning measuremen of ph It is clear that suc Newtonian mec man the absolute space, time, and motion whic w notions but from the relations they b ear to sensible ob jects ". Based on this pream , in the op ening pages of abstract mathematical "p oin information c the in nite-dimensional analog af a p oin h zero h this New Relativit h is prop osed. Quan an in nite dimensional funcional in another w and fractal, in a nite-dimensional spacetime, one has a nite n In nite Dimensional Quan the New Relativit Blac and geometrical foundations of String and provided byCERNDocumentServer brought toyouby CORE

is no EPR Paradox in such New Relativity Theory. In addition, a plausible resolution of the Information

Loss in Black Holes is prop osed.

2. The Program of the New Relativity Principle : The Demolition of Today's Absolutes

Recently one of the authors has prop osed that a New Relativity principle may b e op erating in Nature

which could reveal imp ortant clues to nd the origins of M theory [1]. Wewere forced to intro duce this

new Relativity principle, where all dimensions and signatures of spacetime are on the same fo oting, to nd a

fully covariant formulation of the p-brane Quantum Mechanical Lo op Wave equations. This New Relativity

Principle, or the principle of Polydimensional Covariance as has b een called byPezzaglia, has also b een

crucial in the derivation of Papap etrou's equations of motion of a spinning particle in curved spaces that

was a long standing problem which lasted almost 50 years [2]. A Cli ord calculus was used where all the

equations were written in terms of Cli ord-valued multivector quantities; i.e one had to abandon the use of

vectors and tensors and replace them by Cli ord-algebra valued quantities, matrices, for example .

The New Relativity Theory [1] rests on four p ostulates :

1. The old Bo otstrap Idea of Chew : Each p-brane is made of all the others. To view a single p-brane

as a fundamental identity is a meaningless concept. p-branes are de ned only in relation to others. This

is Mach's principle once again. For this reason, one must include all dimensions and signatures on the same

fo oting. Pezzaglia [2] has called this the principle of Polydimensional Covariance or Dimensional Demo cracy.

The New Relativity theory reshues, for example, a string history for a 5-brane history; a 9-brane history

for a membrane history; an 11-brane history for a history encompassing all other p-branes...and so forth.

Point and extended instantons and tensionless p-branes are also inlcluded. The tensionless p-brane history

excitations of the in nite dimensional Quantum Spacetime are the " photons " in this New Relativity Theory.

We honestly b elieve that M Theory do es not stand for mystery, membrane, matrix, master, mother,

murky,Moyal....it stands for Mach. The New Relativity theory is based on the ultimate Machian view of

the Quantum Universe the Ultimate Machian " Quantum Computer " : Relationships among entities

are the only meaningful statements one can make . A p erfect example of this are : spin-networks, quantum-

networks, quantum sets, cellular networks, p-Adic Physics,...etc. Since it is undesirable to run o the letters

of the alphab et, bykeep adding letters like M ; F ; S::: Theory,we gather courage to say that by abandoning

the Ego centric Anthrop omorphic view of the Universe and, instead, embracing Mach's view that everything

in the Quantum Universe is interconnected, one reaches the end of the alphab et at Z theory : Z stands for

the ultimate Machian view of the Quantum Universe that dismisses the ego centric view of the Universe

for a Z enthr opic Quantum Universe. Who are we to say that we knoweverything that an electron , a

photon, a quark really " sees " ? Do electrons, quarks....p erform Feynman diagrams ? Has anyone seen a

p oint?

2. Laurent Nottale's Scale-Relativity theory [3].

In the nal analysis, Physics involves, and is ab out, measurements. Physics is an exp erimental science.

Physics deals with exp eriences. On the other hand to measure something one needs a standard of measure-

ment to compare measurements with. It is essential , it is of prime imp ortance, to intro duce resolutions

in Physics. It is meaningless to say that the one has a eld at x.Byx meaning : sp ecifying the value of

the real number x to an in nite numb er of non-p erio dic decimal places. In mathematics we can in nitely

increase the accuracy or degree of resolution at will of any real number by adding digits. However, in

practice we cannot have such arbitrary accuracy provided by mathematical constructions. Even writing an

in nite ap erio dic decimal fraction would require an in nite amount of memory. Therefore, in Physics, it is

necessary to have a nite universal physical "yardstick" whichwould de ne the ultimate Physical Resolution.

Nottale's Scale Realtivity takes the Planck scale as such Universal physical standard of measurement that

is invariant, by de nition, under Scale Relativistic transformations of resolutions, like the sp eed of lightwas

in Einstein's Relativity.

p-adic numb ers and p-adic Physics is a nice attempt to eliminate the problem of having to sp ecify a real

numb er up to in nite digits [11]. The Planck scale is therefore taken as that universal standard of measure

invariant under Scale Relativistic transformations of resolutions . In the same vein that the sp eed of light

was taken by Einstein as the maximum sp eed in Nature, the Planck scale is taken to b e the minimum length.

The sp eed of light allowed Einstein to embrace space with time, since space and time have di erent units. 2

By the same token, to embrace all dimensions one needs a Universal length scale in all dimensions : the

Planck Scale.

As the years pass by, more and more planets have b een found con rming Nottale's predictions within

his framework of Scale-Relativity. Instead of b eing prop erly rewarded with increased curiosity and interest in

his remarkable theory, he has b een increasingly rewarded with insults and a su o cating censorship [12]. As

the numb er of his planet con rmations increases, so do es the numb er of insults increases and the censorship

of his work is tightened further. Unfortunately, the New Relativity Theory will never b e able to explain such

o dd phenomena.

The Universal scale, in units of h = c =1,in any dimensions, D>2intwo dimensions the Einstein-

Hilb ert action is a top ological invariant is :

1 1

D 2 D 3

=G = G = ::::::::::: =10 cms: 1a

D D 1

where G ;G ::::: are the Newton gravitational coupling constants in di erent dimensions. In the same

D D 1

fashion that in Newtonian Physics one only can assign a de nite meaning to the ratio of masses it is

meaningless to say that one has a value of m without a comparison to another mass , in the New Relativity

theory it only makes sense to write :

D 3 lnG

D 1

= : 1b

D 2 lnG

In the New Relativity Theory it is meaningless to talk ab out such things as " compacti cation " , "

decompacti cation " used in the literature that relates the Newton constants in di erent dimensions through

the small radius of a compacti ed unseen dimension at low energies. It as meaningless as saying that the

velo cities of the gas molecules in a ro om exp erience a dynamical or sp ontaneous " compacti cation " to a

xed average value.

Problems with the compacti cation picture of Sup erstring theory from 10 to 4 were already alarming

signals that something could b e wrong. Billions and billions of p ossible four-dimensional phenomenological

theories of the world were obtained : the so-called uniqueness of string theory went out the window when

this was found. String theory wasn't the problem, assuming a xed dimensions was ! Witten already proved

long ago that something might b e inherently wrong with the compacti cation schemes, when he showed

using Index Theory arguments, that the standard 11-dim Sup egravity Kaluza-Klein compacti cations of

ordinary manifolds did not yield chiral fermions in 4 dimensions. This problem was bypassed in the second

string revolution bysaying that orbifold compacti cation were ne b ecause orbifolds are not really ordinary

manifolds, so things were satisfactory after all. The New Relativity Theory do es not have to face these

challenges. One has a truly in nite-dimensional Quantum Universe which suggests that Top ological Field

Theories could b e the most natural candidates for a theory of the world. Since b elow the Planck scale there

is no such thing as a distance; it is very likely that Top ology should play a more imp ortant role.

Conformal Field Theories and their Higher Conformal spin extensions are the ones to use in D =2.In

D = 2, one has induced gravity: W ;W :::W gravity as a result of integrating out the conformal matter

2 3 1

eld uctuations. This replaces the top ological invariant Einstein-Hilb ert action. In D = 1 dimension there

is only extrinsic curvature. One can view a one-dim lo op as the b oundary of a two-dimensional surface.

This allowed [7] to write down a String Representation of Quantum Lo ops from a covariantized phase space

Schild action path integral. The e ective action for the b oundary, with induced extrinsic curvature terms

was obtained, in addition to the Polyakov Bulk partition function and the holographic b oundary Eguchi

wave functional as well.

3. Noncommutative C-spaces. One of the authors was forced to enlarge the naive notion of commuting

spacetime co ordinates to fully covariantize the Quantum Mechanical Lo op Equations for p-branes. One

achieved that goal if one extended the notion of ordinary spacetime vectors and tensors, to a Noncommutative

C-space, or Cli ord manifold, where all p-branes were uni ed in one single fo oting by using Cli ord-algebra

valued multivectors quantities matrices instead of ordinary vectors and tensors. In order to combine

ob jects of di erent dimensionality one needs a length scale : the Planck scale.

There was a one-to-one corresp ondence b etween a nested hierarchy of p oint, lo op, 2-lo op, 3-lo op ...... p-

lo op histories in D dimensions enco ded in terms of hyp er-matrices and single lines in Cli ord Manifolds. This

is roughly similiar to the aim of Penrose's twistor progam. By using Cli ord-algebra valued multivectors, 3

one could argue whyitmay b e meaningless to say that the cosmological constant is a constant in its de nition

! The so-called cosmological constant is observer-dep endent in this New Relativity Theory : it is just one

of the many comp onents of the Cli ord multivectors. Due to Polydimensional Covariance, only the norm

of suchmultivector is truly an invariant. So using this simple argument one of us was able to argue whyit

is meaningless to try to measure such constant, unless one is sp ecifying what is the frame of reference one

lives in !

The reader maysay that the value of p = 1was not included here. Point and Extended Instantons

can also b e treated very naturally in this framework [1]. The New Relativity Theory reshues, for example,

a lo op-history represented by the co ordinates : x ; ;A in one frame of reference, to another history,in

0 0 0

another frame of reference, represented by the lo op-instanton x ; ;A = 0. The x are the center of

mass co ordinates of the lo op. A is the areal-time spanned by the motion of the lo op through spacetime.

are the holographic co ordinates of the lo op. It can reshue a massive p oint history a line : x ; 6=0 to

0 0

a massive p oint-instanton : x ; = 0 in another frame of reference. An so forth.

4. Quantum Spacetime must b e treated from a Multivector-Multiscale p oint of view. The use of Cli ord-

valued multivectors was explained ab ove. The multi-scale or resolution asp ects are based on Nottale's fractals

and El Naschie' s Cantorian-Fractal Quantum Spacetime views that dimensions are resolution dep endent

concepts and not xed notions [3,4] .

Nottale, by abandoning the hyp othesis of the di erentiablity of spacetime , was led to three e ects at

least : i . The numb er of geo desics b ecomes in nite. This forces up on us to jump to a statistical uid-like

description. ii Each geo desic b ecomes a fractal curve of higher and higher fractal dimensionality as the

resolution of the " physical apparatus " b ecomes ner and ner, asymp otically approaching the minimum

Planck scale resolution where the fractal dimensionality b ecomes in nite. This forces us to emb ed the fractal

geo desics in an spacetime of in nite-Hausdor dimensions. iii. The symmetry dt !dt is broken by the

non-di erentiablity which leads to a two-valuedness character of the average velo cityvector and which is,

in Nottale's view, the underlying reason why the wave function in QM is complex.

This is not the ultimate status of things. To b e consistent and to move forward along the path charted

by Mach and Einstein, one cannot, and should not , accept this status quo as the " end of the road " in

Physics. This reminds us of the status of things at the end of the 19 century when " two clouds " were the

only obstacles hovering over the horizon that prevented the " end " of Physics. In fact, one cannot but to

feel comp elled to say that from the b eginning, a truly quantum mechanical description of the world must

start by abandoning the v er y notion of spacetime itsel f and other " idols " from our minds, as Finkesltein

has p ointed out [8]. This is precisely the goal of p-Adic Physics [11] to remove the notion of spacetime

p er se and replace it by ob jects and their relationships. A truly Categorical view of the Universe. An

extension of Einstein's motion Relativity and Nottale's Scale Relativityinto a un ed Scale-Motion Realtivity

was outlined brie y in [13]. Whatever the " nal" view of the world may b e, it seems that it is wrong to

assume that Quantum Spacetime has a xed dimension. On the contrary,itmayhave uncountably-in nite

dimensions as El Naschie has argued [4]. Taking this in nite-dimensional p oint of view allows us to eliminate

the notion of a EPR , and p ossibly, Black-Hole Information Loss "paradoxes ". For this reason we b elieve

it oughttobeinvestigated further. Dimensions are not xed absolutes. They are resolution dep endent

concepts.

Quantum Gravityisnot a quantization of the spacetime co ordinates, metric.....If this were the case,

one would have had quantized the spacetime co ordinates long ago. In String Theory, from the two-dim

world sheet p oint of view , the spacetime co ordinates are nothing but a nite numb er of scalar elds whose

quantization is essentially trivial by selecting the conformal or orthonormal gauge. The same arguments

applies with the linearized spin two graviton. Quantum Gravity it is something much deep er than the

naive notion of co ordinates and gravitons. It is something that do esn't need any spacetime background nor

metrics whatso ever. Morever, it involves something that disp oses of the ill-conceived notion of having a xed

dimension. The classical spacetime that we p erceive with our senses is just a long distance averaging e ect

asso ciated with a quantum network of pro cesseses of a deep er underlying Quantum Universe. Einstein's

Gravity is an e ective theory as susp ected long ago. To merge Quantum Mechanics with Relativityitis

necessary to enlarge the Einsteinian view of Relativity to a New Relativity Principle [1]. To pro ceed further

one has to demolish the concept of dimension as an absolute , as an idol.

To sum up what has b een said so far : 4

The New Relativity Theory forces up on us to take a radically di erent view of the Quantum World,

an ultimate Machian/Zenthropic view, and to dismiss the concepts of false absolutes idols of dimensions,

spacetime, cosmological constant , from our classical minds, as Finkelstein [8] has advo cated. If a true

evolution revolution of Physics is to take place one has to embrace the plausible extensions of Relativity

as Finkelstein has insisted [8]. For those who b elieve that wehave reached the end of the road, the end of

Physics, we feel that they are setting themselves for similar surprises that Lord Kelvin exp erienced with the

advent of Quantum Mechanics and Relativity.

To this day , to the b est of our knowledge, there is no satisfactory de nition yet of Quantum Field

Theory. QFT to day is b eing challenged by deep er concepts : Noncommutative Geometry, Quantum Groups,

Hopf algebras, Monoidal Braided Categories, Braided QFT, etc.... Relativity itself is hereby extended to

a deep er meaning by the New Relativity Theory : Scale Relativity and Cantorian-Fractal Geometry.A

Nested Hierarchy of Histories have replaced the old fashioned concepts of spacetime events; vectors and

tensors have b een replaced by Cli ord-multivectors; Riemannian Geometry by Finsler Geometry and by

Fractal-Cantorian, Non-Archimedean, p Adic , Noncommutative and Nonasso ciative Geometries.....

Recently wehave prop osed to even abandon the the idea of the cosmological constant as a constant.

The so-called cosmological constantisnot a constant in its de nition ! It is observer-dep endent within the

framework of the New Relativity Theory [1]. Trying to estimate the absolute values of such a " constant"

is like trying to detect absolute spacetime motion and to verify the existence of the ether ! Such ideas that

the vacuum energy could b e observer dep endent orginated with discussions held in Trieste by one of us with

Miguel Cardenas and Devashis Benarjee [9]. Even the notion of the "vacuum" p er se ! Sp ecial Relativity

demolished such framework of thinking. We b elieve that the New Relativity Theory will also replace the

existence of such ill-conceived notions that spacetime has a xed dimension and that the cosmological

constant has an well de ned absolute value in all frame of references.

The observed spacetime dimension of D = 4 is interpreted in this New Relativity Theory [4] as a result

of an averaging pro cedure over all the p ossible in nite values of Quantum Spacetime. In a sense it is

similar to what happ ens with the statistical distribution of velo cities of a gas. There is an average velo city

average over all the in nite p ossible values of the statistical ensemble prop ortional to the Temp erature. To

assume that there is a spacetime compacti cation from D=11 to D=4 like it is assumed in mainstream

Physics to day is an incongrous assumption in this New Relativity Theory : it is likesaying that there

is a " velo city compacti cation/decompacti cation " from higher/lower velo cities to the average observed

velo city in a gas. Problems with the compacti cation picture of Sup erstring theory from 10 to 4 were already

alarming signals when billions and billions of p ossible four-dimensional theories of the world were obtained

: the so-called uniqueness of string theory went out the window when this was found. String theory wasn't

the problem, assuming a xed dimensions was ! The fact that there might b e an Statistical approachtothe

Dimensions, and to Quantum Gravity p er se, was already lurking b ehind the scenes long ago in the work of

Hawking : Black Hole Thermo dynamics !

3. There is No Such Thing as an Einstein-Rosen-Po dolski Paradox in the New Relativity

We will present a few-lines pro of why there is no EPR Paradox within the framework of the New

Relativity Theory if one assumes that information ows in a similar fashion as ordinary charges in Electro-

magnetism ; i.e information is to b e thought of as a " eld " [14]. Interestingly enough, this will b e our only

assumption. We are not implying that there is such a thing as a " fth " force in Nature found one morning

in the closet of our homes after a bad night. We are just voicing out what has b een irrefutably proven over

and over by exp eriments.

Take an electron-p ositron pair colliding at the center O of an in nite dimensional sphere, S for D !1,

at a givent momentwe call t = 0. After the collision a pair of two photons will travel in opp osite directions

imp osed by energy-momentum conservation. An any given moment after the collision, we can lo cate those

two photons at the surface of a multidimensional sphere of radius R = ct. The ux of information from

the center of the sphere O owing from the moment of the e =e collision radially outwards through the

hyp ersurface is :

~ ~

= J :dS = J S : 2

D D 1 D D 1 5

This is nothing but the usual Gauss Law in Electromagnetism. The D -dimensional information-current, J ,

p oints radially outwards from the center O. Due to hyp er-spherical symmetry its magnitude only dep ends

on the radius R = ct.At each given p oint on the hyp ersurface, the current is p ointing radially outwards and

has the same value of magnitude, J R, along all the p oints of the hyp er-sphere, This is why one can pull

out the current outside the integral. The hyp ersurface S encloses inside a V volume given in terms of

D 1 D

gamma functions. Similar considerations apply to the higher-dimensional solid angle :

D=2 D

R dV dV 1

D D

D 1

V = : S = = R : = : 3

D D 1 D 1 D 1

D +2

D 1

dR R dR

Therefore, the total information- ux is given by the usual Gauss Law:

D=2 D 1

D R dV 1

D 1 D 1

= J R: : 4 =J R:R = J R:R :

D D D 1 D

D +2

D 1

R dR

Nowwe take the D !1 limit and make use of Stirling's asymptotic formula for the gamma function :

Pictures drawn on a Mathematica package also verify explicitly the results b elow

D +2 D +2

2 2

e : 5 lim 2

D !1

2 2

By Radius R = ct one means radius in Planck scale units. We will set the Planck scale to 1.Soby lnR in

all of the formulae b elowwe mean lnR= Otherwise the units will not match up.

As D !1 one can verify that in the asymptotic D = 1 limit the numerator expression for the ux

approaches :

D D

exp [lnD + ln +D 1lnR] exp [lnD + ln + DlnR] exp [lnD + Dln + DlnR] 6

2 2

whereas the denominator approaches :

D +2 D +2 D +2

ln ] exp [DlnD D ] exp [D 1lnD] exp [DlnD]: 7 exp [

2 2 2

Hence, the ux in the in nite D limit is :

=J exp [lnD + Dln + DlnR DlnD]=Je : 8a

To b e precise, up on reinserting the Planck scale one has that the ux is given in Planck units as :

D 1 D 1

=J e = Je 1 = Je : 8b

where is :

= D ln + lnR+ 1 D lnD D [ln + lnR lnD] 9

For f inite times , in units of = 1, R = ct 6= 1 the co ecient go es to negative in nity:

DlnD !1e ! 0 10

D=2 D 1

D R

lim J R: ! J R 0= J R !1: 11

D !1 D 1 1

D +2

hence, in the D = 1 limit, the current in Planck units, = 1 blows up. This is not b ecause there is a

sup erluminal sp eed of information. It is b ecause the hyp er-volume, hyp er-area elements, for nite values

of R,gotozero in in nite dimensions!. Everything shrinks to a hyp erp oint despite the fact that the radius 6

is not zero ! The hyp erp oint is the in nite-dimensional version of a p oint in ordinary nite-dimensional

spacetime.

The current is as usual of the form : J = v . As the hyp er-volume, hyp er-area elements, for nite

values of R, go to zero, the information charge density ,charge p er unit hyp er-volume, blows up !. The

information charge density diverges at the hyp erp oint. The information velo city v is constant and cannot

exceed the sp eed of light. From the p oint of view of an in nite-dimensional observer, all the p oints of

the hyp ersurface are interconnected. There is no such thing as non-lo cality in Quantum Mechanics.

This is an illusion due to the shrinking to zero for nite radius of the in nite-dimensional volume of the

hyp ersphere, resulting from the asymptotic b ehaviour of the gamma functions !

This corrob orates Mach's brilliant insight that everything is connected in the Quantum Universe.

What happ ens here and now, a ects everything in the Universe in an instant. Based on the recent teletrans-

p ortation exp eriments of a single photon by several exp erimental teams, this view of the Quantum Universe

may lead an advance future generation of op en minded scientists to achieve the ultimate communication

system : instant exchange of information to anyplace in the Universe by tapping into the in nite dimensions

of Quantum Spacetime. An sp eculative application of this would b e to tele-transp ort a quantum copyof

the human genome to other distant Planets in the Universe suitable for life. This would b e a way out of the

Galactic b ounds we live in and an escap e of the ultimate fate of the earth : consumed by the Sun when it

b ecomes a Red Giant.

Spacetime travel in an instant will b e much harder to achieveifby travel on means tele-transp orting a

quantum copy of ourselves to another p oint in the Universe. In order to do that one has to b e able to tele-

transp ort our consciousness as well. We adscrib e to Penrose's view that consciousness is a non-algorithmic

pro cess. This agrees with the Uncountably-in nite numb er of dimensions of the Cantorian-Fractal Spacetime

view of El Naschie [4]. It would b e imp ossible for a Quantum Turing Machine a Quantum Computer to

quantum-pro cess suchvast of uncountably-in nite numb er of quantum bits. Never, in our wildest dreams

we could p ossibly count such large numb er of dimensions of the Cantorian-Fractal Spacetime of El Naschie

[4] . SuchWorld is not a mere Mathematical abstraction : it is essential for Consciousness to emerge. It is

desirable that The Theory of " Everyhthing " should include Consciousnes. The Theory of Everything has to

account for the existence of Conscious life and when, why,how, and for what it emerged from the Quantum

Universe. A "p ointeless " Universe is another one of those alarming signals that something is inherently

incomplete with our view of the World. We b elieve that it is not sucient to dismiss these questions as

"meaningless metaphyiscs ".

Up on closer insp ection of eq-11, if one were to set J = f inite ; this would imply that the information

ux=0soby Gauss Law there is no net information charge enclosed in the hyp ersphere. This is not

correct for the following reason.

Nottale's Scale Relativity implies that it is not p ossible to have zero measures with zero resolutions.

It is p ossible to have zero measures but with nonzero Planck scale resolutions. The e =e pair never

go es b eyond the minimum Plank scale resolution. The center O of the hyp ersphere is not a physical p oint.

It is a smeared fuzzy hyp ersphere of in nite dimensions but with a nonzero Planck scale radius. This is a

reason why Noncommutative Geometry,Fuzzy Phyiscs, Quantum Groups ....could b e the right approaches

to lo ok at the world at small scales. Thus the information charge is distributed " uniformly " , in discrete

bits of Planckhyp er-area, in Planck units , over the outer " surface " of the hyp erball of Planck radius.

There is no inside. Inside is meaningless notion b elow the Planck scale, this is why the information charge

has to reside on the " surface ". It would not b e so surprising if this mechanism could b e linked to the

Bekenstein-Hawking entropy-area relationship of Black Holes.

The numb er of dimensions increases as one prob es ner and ner r esol ution-scales not to b e confused

with lengths, although they b oth have the same units. By resolutions one means the resolutions that a

physical apparatus can resolve. Resolutions which are not the same thing as the spacetime lab els of a "

p oint",event " like x . Resolutions that so far until Nottale have b een overlo oked in the description of

Physics. As one approaches asymptotically the Planck scale r esol ution , the hyp ersphere of Planck scale

radius b ecomes more and more " visible" to us . To b e able to reach this limiting " threshold " of r esol utions

in our physical apparatus, an in nite amount Energy is required as Nottale has argued. By the same token

that it takes an in nite amount of energy to accelerate a mass nonzero rest mass from rest to the sp eed of

light, it takes an in nite energy to prob e Planck scale-resolutions. The nal in nite-dimensional hyp ersphere, 7

containing the information charge lo cated at the " origin " O, shrinks to a hyp erp oint of zero size , but

nite Planck radius, The information charge density also diverges at the in nite-dimensional p oint : the

hyp erp oint of nonzero Planck radius. Exactly in the same way it did for hyp erspheres of radius R = ct up on

taking the in nite dimension limit.

Concluding, the ux is not zero. There is a net information charge enclosed by the hyp ersphere with

center O and radius R = ct.

Exactly the same argument o ccur if one asks the question : What do es one of the photons " see " ?

It will " see " the other photon at a distance l =2R =2ct in Planck units moveaway at the sp eed of

light. Due to the Doppler e ect, the frecuency will b e redshifted so much that the photon will app ear to b e

completely dark, with zero frecuency . For nite values of the radius, l =2R =2ct, the hyp ersphere centered

at one of the photons will again shrink to a zero size , to a hyp erp oint, in the in nite Dimensional large

D limit. Therefore, when a Macroscopic Observer with a Physical Apparatus measures the p olarization

of one particular photon, it will transfer its information to the other photon in an instant due to the fact

that b oth of the photons have access to an extremely large numb er of dimensions in comparison to the

macroscopic observers; i.e the photons truly live inside the hyp erp oint. For this reason, they are able to

exchange information in an instant without actually having a sup erluminal sp eed of information ! It is the

information charge density and information current J that diverges once again at the hyp erp oint, and not

the information sp eed. It is only an illusion due to the shrinking to zero of the hyp ersphere in the in nite

dimensional limit.

Of course, the e =e pair do es not attain such in nite energies to prob e Planck scale resolutions, they

come very close to each other but never reach the Planck scale. As they approach each other more and

more dimensions b ecome visible to them. Much more dimensions than the dimensions of the apparent

one-dimensional world to a macroscopic observer lo oking at the line b etween the two emerging photons

while p erforming his exp eriment. . E ectively, the numb er of dimensions of the world visible to the e =e

pair, and the two emerging photons , is very high in comparison to the apparent D =1;D = 4 of the

macrosp copic observers , that for all practical purp opses, one can take the in nite dimensional limit of the

gamma functions. The diagrams explicitly show that the hyp ervolume, hyp erareas fall-o very rapidly to

zero as D moves far away from the D = 4. It is not necessary to actually take the in nite dimensional limit

to o literate.

A related textb o ok issue is the following : Imagine a rapid moving observer passing by ourselves during

the night while we are gazing at the stars. Due to the Lorentz contraction the celestial sphere that he

exp eriences will naturally shrink with resp ect to us. It shrinks, but do es it app ear attened ? The answer

is no. One can view the Lorentz transformations in spinor terms as a SL2;C Mobius transformation. Since

the Mobius transformation maps circles to circles, the celestial sphere will have shrunk in radius only but it

will not b e attened.

Similar analogy happ ens to the photon. What do es a photon " see " ? Since wehave said earlier

that one cannot for certain answer such questions. We can only follow what we know so far : Due to the

in nite Lorentz contraction the celestial sphere will shrink to a p oint. Do esn't this contradict Nottale view

that the Planck scale is the mimimal length ? The answer is no. Once again wehave to take the variable

dimensions of the Quantum World that a photon exp eriences. The photon is a quantum entity. Nobody

can deny this. The photon of a given energy E =h! will prob e resolutions larger than the Planck scale.

Rigorously sp eaking , we should write : E =h k ! . In [1] wehave shown that the New Relativity

ef f

Theory demands an energy-dep endent e ective Planck constant so that [x; p]= ih k to repro duce the

ef f

full blown Quantum Spacetime Uncertainty Relations that are more general than the String Uncertainty

Relations : wehave included the e ects of all extended ob jects [1]. It was shown rigorously why one cannot

prob e resolutions smaller than the Planck scale. As energy b egins to b e pump-in, one cannot prob e smaller

scales. Spacetime actually starts to grow. It is p ossible that a p olymerization growth pro cess of the Quantum

Spacetime b egins : an in nite chain of self similar branched p olymers is triggered and baby universes branch

o . The Quantum Universe mightbeanever self-repro ducing , self-recursive, self-iterated fractal pro cess as

Linde has suggested.

Only at in nite energy will a photon b e able to prob e the Planck scale. The celestial hyp ersphere that

the photon " sees " has a radius of the order of the inverse photon Energy, roughly, assuming it is a low

energy photon, Energy and resolution are inversely correlated at that level., not at higher enegy levels. Scale 8

Relativity implies that the Compton wavelength and momentum are decoupled as one approaches Planck

scales. It takes an in nite energy to prob e the Planck scale. The Planck scale is the ultimate Ultaviolet

Regulator. However, due to the e ectively large numb er of dimensions that the photon has access to, despite

the fact the hyp ersphere has a nonzero radius, the celestial hyp ersphere shrinks to zero size consistent with

the in nite Lorentz contraction ! . It is true that one has to construct the full Scale-Motion Relativity [13]

to b e fully rigourous and consistent. Wehave presented a solution to the apparent paradoxofhow one can

have a zero measure/size due to the in nite Lorentz contraction with a nonzero resolution for a radius :

In nite large numb er of Dimensions is the key once again !

Therefore, in essence : By intro ducing the notion of hyp erp oint in physics, which is forced up on us

by the New Relativity Principle as a result of having a truly in nite dimensional Quantum World. wehave

imbued a mathematical p oint with a true physical meaning : it is an in nite-dimensional hyp ersphere, of

zero size but nonzero radius !.

When t = 1 then the co ecient will no longer b e negative in nity due to a cancellation b etween

lnR and lnD :

D [ln + lnR lnD]=D [ln + lnct lnD] Dln e !1: 12

In this case, one has the opp osite result : the value of the information current J at R = 1 collapses to

zero, as it should on physical grounds. The information eld must vanish at in nityin any dimension, nite

or in nite. As the photons moveaway from eachother, if one waits an in nite amount of time to p eform the

EPR exp eriment, the photons will no longer b e correlated !

To sum up :

The EPR Paradox only o ccurs to the one-dimensional b eings or nite-dimensional b eings living along

the linear path around the linear path of the photons who wish to p erform the EPR gedanken exp eriment.

From their nite-dimensional p oint of a view, QM app ears to b e non-lo cal : a sup erluminal transfer of

information app ears to take place. From the p oint of view of the New Relativity Theory there is no paradox

b ecause Quantum Spacetime is truly in nite-dimensional. For those Quantum-dimensional b eings who were

able to tap into the e ectively "in nite" numb er of dimensions of Quantum Spacetime at the very " moments

" when the e =e pair collided, at a very small distance separation among them, distance which cannot

b e smaller than the Planck scale as indicated by Nottale's Scale Relativity, there is no suchParadoxat

all ! : the information current blows up b ecause from their in nite-dimensional p oint of view, for nite

values of the radius, the hyp ersphere has shrunk to a hyp erp oint. The transfer of information to the two

photons, ab out the spin and other quantum numb ers of the e =e pair, o ccurs in an instant! Every p oint

in their universe is inter-connected as Mach argued long ago. Similar arguments apply to the two photons

when a macroscopic observer measures the p olarization of one photon, the information is transfered to the

other photon in an instant via an e ectively " in nite " dimensional relative to the macroscopic observers

Quantum Spacetime accesible to them.

This should encourage us to view Feynman's path integral formulation of QM taking all p osible paths

in a nite dimensional spacetime, from the New Relativity Theory p oint of view : it is p ossible to havea

nite numb er of paths in an In nite Dimensional Quantum Spacetime. The main question is : Where do es

the Feynman statistical complex-weighting of the paths via the e comes from ?

The partial answer was given by Ord [10] , Nottale [3] and others :

Since fractal paths have a dominantweight in the path integral compared to the smo oth ones, the

latter have a zero measure compare to the former, roughly sp eaking, Quantum E ects manifest or channel

themselves via the fractality of spacetime. Although there are p eople who do not subscrib e to this view.

Fractal curves are continous but nowhere di erentiable. This means that the derivatives are discrete-

valued. The discrete jumps of the values of the tangents are "quantized" in units of what has b een called

by mathematicians the " Planck " constant of a curve. In this fashion the Feynamn e weighting factor is

interpreted although , wemust say that no rigorous pro of of this has b een given as far as we know.

Fractals and Scale Relativity are essential b ecause as the resolutions that a physical apparatus can

resolve reach the mimimal Planck scale resolution resolutions must not to b e confused with statistical

uncertainties nor with ordinary lengths the numb er of fractal dimensions blows up. For a new Phase space

path integral derivation of Feynman's particle propagator that is r oug hl y based on these ideas that a fractal

particle " path " can have a meaning in QM see [7]. 9

The apparent sup erluminal information velo city happ ens in other asp ects of Physics. There is a very

simple analogy with sup erluminal jets in Astrophysics [5] . If one takes a ash light at a suciently large

distance from a wall and rotates it very rapidly , the image on the wall can app ear to move faster than light.

However the image is not a truly physical ob ject. The physical photons never move faster than light. The

image is comprised of many di erent photons and not of a xed particular numb er of them . The maximum

angular velo city of rotation of the ash light is b ounded by Sp ecial Relativity:

! = 13

max

where r is the length of the ashlight. If the distance to the wall is R then the apparentvelo city of the

shadowis:

v = >c: 14

The unphysical ob ject shadow can move faster than light. One do es not even have togotosuch extremes

of achieving the maximal angular sp eed for the ash light , one can simply cho ose the wall far enough, and

the ashlight sucently bright, R large enough so the image on the wall moves with a sup erluminal

velo city !R > c. Exactly similar arguments o ccur with the phase velo cityinwave propagation. The phase

velo city can b e greater that c but the physical group velo city is always b ounded by c.Taking the number of

Dimensions to in nity, mimics this simple example of taking the distance to the wall far enough and rotating

the ash light fast enough.

Similar arguments can b e taken with the so called Back Hole Information loss Paradox. Since Quantum

Spacetime is truly in nite dimensional, there is no such thing as an Information Loss. This information is

stored in all the in nite numb er of dimensions that are inaccesible to an outside low energy observer. There

is information radiated away and a remnant " hidden " in the in nite numb er of dimensions inaccesible to

the outside observers. Black Hole evap oration stops at the minimal scale in Nature : the Planck scale,

reaching a maximum temp erature, Planck's Temp erature. Scale Realtivity not only induces an e ective

2 2

value of the Planck's constant: h k [1], it also a ects the Boltzmann constantaswell : k k so that

ef f B

2 2

: k k T =h k ! . As one reaches the Planck scale, energy blows up but the temp erature reaches

B ef f

asymptotically the maximum PlanckTemp erature thermal Relativity. One must have a standard of

temp erature to compare temp eratures with. That maximum universal standard is the PlanckTemp erature

whose de nition in D = 4 is :

=1:42 10 K: 15 T =

Astrophysicits have b een baed by recent ndings that there are unexplained extremely bright and

unrelenting sources of energy. It is warranted to study these phenomena within the framework of the

New Relativity Theory. To b e able to " see " all the information one has to tap into all the in nite

numb er of dimensions of the Quantum Spacetime. Toachieve that one requires in nite amount of energy

to prob e the Planck scale resolutions according to the Scale Relativity Principle . At that scale in nite

Dimensions, in nite Energy and in nite Information merges into the " Omega " hyp erp oint , the "

Trinity" hyp erp oint..... the ultimate in nite-dimensional p oint: At that scale, the " Trinity" hyp erp oint,

Dimensions, Energy and Information are indistinguishable from each other. More details will b e given later.

Acknowledgements

We are indebted to E. Spallucci for a very constructive critical remarks. We thank G. Chapline.

L.Nottale , W. Pezzaglia, M. El Naschie and D. Finkelstein for illuminating discussions. Finally many

thanks to C. Handy and M. Handy for their assistance and encouragement.

References

1. C. Castro : " The String Uncertainty Relations follow from the New Relativity Principle "

hep-th/0001023. "

" Hints of a New Relativity Principle from p-brane Quantum Mechanics " hep-th/9912113.

" Is Quantum Spacetime In nite Dimensional ? hep-th/0001134. 10

"Towards the Search for the Origins of M Theory, Lo op Quantum Mechanics and

Bulk/Boundary Duality ...... hep-th/9809102.

2. W. Pezzaglia : " Dimensionally Demo cratic Calculus and Principles of Polydimensional

Physics " gr-qc/9912025.

3. L. Nottale : Fractal Spacetime and Microphysics, Towards the Theory of Scale Relativity

World Scienti c 1992.

L. Nottale : La Relativite dans Tous ses Etats. Hachette Literature. Paris. 1999.

4. M. El Naschie : Jour. Chaos, Solitons and Fractals vol 10 nos. 2-3 1999 567.

5. Phillip Morrison : Conversations held with Carlos Castro at MIT in 1980.

6. . C. Castro, A. Granik et al : In preparation.

7. S. Ansoldi, A. Aurilia and E. Spallucci : Eur. J. Physcs C 21 2000 1-12. quant-ph/9910074.

S.Ansoldi, C. Castro, E. Spallucci : Class. Quantum. Gravity 16 1999 1833.

8. D. Finkelstein : " Third Relativity " Georgia Tech preprint, January 2000.

" Emptiness and Relativity " Georgia Tech preprint. Decemb er 1999.

9. D. Benarjee, M. Cardenas : Private Communication.

10. G. Ord : J. Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 10 2-3 1999 499.

11. M. Altaisky, B. Sidharth : Journal of Chaos, Solitons and Fractals vol 10 2-3 1999 167.

l. Brekke, P.Freund : Phys. Rep orts 231 1993 1-66.

V. Valdimorov, I. Volovich, E. Zelenov: p-adics in Mathematical Physics. World Scienti c 1992.

A. Khrennikov : Non Archimedean Analyis, Quantum Paradoxes , Dynamical Systems and

Biological Mo dels. Kluwer Publisng 1998.

12. L. Nottale : Private Communication

13. C. Castro : J. Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 10 2-3 1999 295.

14. M. El Naschie : On the Uni cation of the Fundamental Forces and Complex Time

in the E Space. Jour. Chaos. Solitons and Fractals 11 2000 1149-1162. 11